Vermont — Hiring & Onboarding

Vermont employers are generally prohibited from asking about or requiring disclosure of a prospective employee’s criminal history record information on an initial employment application. This “ban-the-box” restriction is set in 21 V.S.A. § 495j(a): no criminal history inquiry until interview stage or after the applicant is otherwise found qualified—unless a statutory exception applies.

Statutory exception — BOTH conditions required. 21 V.S.A. § 495j(b)(1) creates a narrow exception, but it is tighter than a casual read might suggest:

• (A) Federal or Vermont law must create a mandatory or presumptive disqualification from the position based on one or more types of criminal offenses (for example, jobs where law prohibits persons with certain convictions—like school bus drivers, law enforcement, or positions with fiduciary duty or working with vulnerable populations).
• (B) Any criminal history questions on the initial application must be strictly limited to “the types of criminal offenses creating the disqualification or obligation.” A blanket or broad criminal history question is NOT permitted. Employers may only ask about those specific offenses that trigger the statutory barrier, and nothing broader.

In short, the exception is not a license for general criminal background questions on the application. The application can only ask about precisely those offenses that, by law, would make someone ineligible or presumptively ineligible for the particular position.

Example: An application for a role where state or federal law bars hiring persons with a felony theft conviction may include a question about felony theft, but cannot ask about misdemeanors or unrelated convictions.

Affirmative opportunity to explain: Even when an application-stage inquiry is allowed, Vermont law requires the employer to give the applicant an opportunity, at or after the interview, to explain the circumstances and present evidence of rehabilitation, unless the law categorically bars employment for that offense.

Penalty: Civil penalties can reach up to $100 per violation.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495j

Vermont requires every employer to report newly hired and rehired employees to the Vermont Department of Labor within 10 calendar days of the employee's first day of paid work. A "new hire" includes anyone newly employed or rehired after a separation of at least 60 consecutive days.

Required information: Employers must report the following seven elements:

• Employee: name, address, Social Security number, first date of employment.
• Employer: name, address, and federal employer identification number (FEIN).

Reporting methods — statute vs. agency requirement: Vermont statute requires employers to report new hire data "electronically, when practicable, or on a form supplied or approved by the Department of Labor" (33 V.S.A. § 4110(b)(3)). The statute itself does not impose a numerical threshold for mandatory electronic filing.

Agency administrative guidance — electronic filing threshold: The Vermont Department of Labor, in its Form C-63 "New Hire Reporting Requirements" and on its official website, requires employers who file more than 10 new hire reports to do so electronically via the department's online portal. Employers reporting 10 or fewer may report online (preferred), or submit by mail or fax using Form C-61. This 10-report policy is a matter of departmental guidance and is not found in the statute. Employers should refer to the most current C-63 guidance for compliance.

Who must be reported: Any employee within the meaning of Internal Revenue Code § 3401(d) (workers for federal income tax withholding purposes). Independent contractors are generally excluded. Federal or state intelligence/counterintelligence employees may be excepted if agency head certifies that reporting would endanger safety or an ongoing mission. A rehire must be reported again only after a separation of at least 60 days requiring a new IRS Form W-4.

Purpose: The new hire registry supports child support enforcement and is also used for unemployment insurance administration.

Penalties: Failure to report a new hire can result in a civil penalty of $25 per unreported employee; if conspiracy to avoid reporting is found, a much higher $350 penalty can apply (33 V.S.A. § 4110(d)-(e)). No additional penalty to the obligee is imposed by statute for a non-collusive failure to report.

Sources: 33 V.S.A. § 4110 Vermont Department of Labor, Form C-63 New Hire Reporting Requirements

Vermont imposes a civil penalty of $25 for each employee the employer fails to report as a new hire or rehire within the required 10-day period. This standard penalty is set in 33 V.S.A. § 4110(d).

If the Vermont Department of Labor finds collusion or conspiracy between the employer and employee to avoid reporting, a heightened penalty of $350 per unreported employee applies (33 V.S.A. § 4110(e)). These penalties are assessed by the Department of Labor, which is responsible for enforcing new hire reporting and providing written notice to the employer of the violation and penalty under § 4110(d)-(e).

No other penalty amount is referenced in 33 V.S.A. § 4110 as of June 2026.

Source: 33 V.S.A. § 4110

Vermont law imposes strict limits on the use of credit reports and credit history in employment decisions. Under 21 V.S.A. § 495i (effective July 1, 2012), employers are categorically prohibited from requiring, requesting, or using an applicant’s or employee’s credit report or credit history in hiring, firing, compensation, or in any terms and conditions of employment, unless a specific statutory exception applies.

Core prohibition:

• Employers may not require employees or applicants to provide credit information or to consent to a credit report. The statutory floor is broad: employers cannot “use, accept, request or require” the credit information of an applicant or employee for most positions.

Statutory exceptions:

• Employers may access or use credit information only if:
• Required by state or federal law or regulation.
• The position involves access to confidential financial information of customers, employees, or the employer (simply handling cash doesn’t qualify—'confidential' information is the threshold).
• The position is law enforcement or “involves significant financial fiduciary responsibility,” both of which are listed explicitly in the statute.
• The employer demonstrates that credit information is a “valid and necessary bona fide occupational requirement” for the job, not as part of a blanket policy.
• Even if an exception applies, the employer must make an individualized job-based determination and record the justification (§ 495i(d)).

Blanket policies prohibited:

• The law prohibits company-wide credit check policies. Exception claims must be tied to the duties of a specific job.

Enforcement and remedies:

• The Vermont Attorney General enforces § 495i. The law does not specify the complaint process in detail—applicants or employees may submit written complaints to the Attorney General’s office or seek remedies available under general state employment discrimination law. Unable to confirm as of 2026-06-17 if there is a more specific statutory complaint process.

Federal context:

• The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) still governs the procedural aspects of credit checks nationwide, but Vermont’s restrictions are more stringent. Following FCRA alone does not guarantee state law compliance in Vermont.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495i

Under Vermont's "ban the box" law, employers who are permitted to inquire into a prospective employee’s criminal history must provide the applicant with a meaningful opportunity to explain the record and circumstances behind any conviction and to present evidence of rehabilitation. This obligation arises under 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c) and applies during the hiring process, specifically at or after the point when criminal history is discussed (i.e., not at the initial application, but after the applicant is deemed otherwise qualified or is in an interview stage allowed by law).

Key timing — after interview/qualification stage: Employers may not ask about criminal history on the initial job application, except for positions with a legal exclusion or barrier based on specific offenses. The opportunity to explain is triggered only when the employer is lawfully permitted to inquire (typically in-person interview or after finding the candidate otherwise qualified), not before. The statute’s text: "If the applicant is eligible or is a finalist for the position, or if the employer has given a conditional offer of employment, the employer shall give the applicant an opportunity to explain the information regarding their criminal history, including rehabilitation."

What must the employer permit?

• Applicants must be permitted to explain the facts and circumstances of any conviction.
• Applicants may offer evidence of rehabilitation.
• Unless a criminal record legally and absolutely disqualifies the applicant from the job, the employer must consider the explanation and evidence before making a final employment decision.

No obligation before criminal history is inquired or discussed: The law does not require employers to solicit or receive such explanations at the initial application stage, since criminal history may not be asked about that early.

Remedy: Failure to allow an opportunity for explanation can result in a civil penalty of up to $100 per violation, enforceable by the Vermont Attorney General or Human Rights Commission.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c)

Vermont law expressly prohibits employers from seeking, requiring, or screening job applicants based on their compensation history—meaning wages, salary, or benefits, as defined in 21 V.S.A. § 495m(a). This ban was enacted in 2017 and took effect July 1, 2018.

Core prohibitions:

• Employers may not ask applicants or a current/former employer about an applicant’s compensation history prior to making an offer of employment with compensation details. This includes direct questions, requirements for disclosure, or making hiring/screening decisions based on past pay. The statute specifically bars “seeking information about, requesting, or requiring disclosure of compensation history,” and “screening applicants based on compensation history, including requiring that compensation history satisfy minimum or maximum criteria.” (21 V.S.A. § 495m(b))
• Employers may not use a third party to attempt to acquire compensation history that the employer itself is barred from requesting.

Exceptions:

• After an employer extends an offer of employment, including an offer of compensation, the employer may confirm compensation history only if:
• The applicant has voluntarily disclosed that information; and
• The employer uses it solely for the purpose of confirming the applicant’s disclosure.
• Applicants may always volunteer compensation history on their own initiative. The employer must not prompt or pressure such disclosure before an offer is made.

Enforcement and remedies:

• The Vermont Attorney General or the Human Rights Commission may enforce this law. The statute does not specify penalty amounts in § 495m itself; however, general remedies for unlawful employment practices under Vermont law may apply, including investigative and civil penalty authority.

There is no comparable federal restriction on salary history inquiries by private employers. Vermont’s ban provides a broader overlay on top of the federal floor.

Effective date: July 1, 2018.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495m

Vermont’s restriction on criminal history inquiries during the hiring process—commonly called “ban-the-box”—applies broadly to all employers, regardless of size. Under 21 V.S.A. § 495j, the law covers every “employer” as defined in § 495d of the same chapter. That definition includes “any individual, organization, or governmental body, partnership, association, corporation, legal representative, trustee, receiver, trustee in bankruptcy and any common carrier by rail, motor, water, air or express company doing business in or operating within this State.” There is no threshold based on number of employees—no carve-out for small employers, family businesses, or sole proprietors.

The text of § 495j does not include any exemptions or reduced obligations for employers with fewer than a particular number of employees, in contrast to some state and federal employment laws that only apply to employers meeting a 15-employee or 50-employee threshold. The practical effect is that even the smallest Vermont employer is prohibited from asking about an applicant’s criminal history record information on the initial application form, except for the tightly defined statutory exceptions related to certain positions subject to legal disqualification (§ 495j(b)).

If a future amendment were to add a size-based exemption, it would need to be stated explicitly. As of June 2026, however, coverage is categorical across all Vermont employers.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495j, 21 V.S.A. § 495d

Under Vermont’s “ban the box” law, any employer who lawfully inquires into a prospective employee’s criminal history must ensure the applicant has a genuine opportunity to explain the information, the circumstances of any conviction, and present postconviction rehabilitation. This obligation comes directly from 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c), which was enacted to prevent automatic disqualification and mandate individualized consideration. As of June 2026, the law applies to both public and private employers with no small-employer exemption.

Timing — when must the opportunity occur? The obligation is triggered only at the point when the employer is lawfully permitted to inquire about criminal history. Vermont prohibits asking about criminal records on the initial application, but once the employer reaches the interview stage, or a conditional offer is made, any inquiry must be accompanied by this opportunity. The statute does not require that the employer wait until after a conditional offer—anytime criminal history is discussed after screening, the applicant must be permitted to explain.

What does “afford an opportunity to explain” require?

• The statute requires that the applicant be allowed to provide context for any convictions, including circumstances and any proof of rehabilitation. Neither the text nor any Vermont court or agency guidance as of June 2026 prescribes a specific process, format, or length—so the opportunity might be provided in writing, in-person at an interview, or via a remote meeting, but it must occur before any adverse decision is made based on the record.
• The employer is not required to overlook mandatory legal exclusions for certain roles (such as offenses that by law exclude someone from a teaching or law enforcement position). However, if the conviction does not create categorical ineligibility, the explanation and supporting evidence must be weighed by the employer before a hiring decision. Refusing to allow an explanation—even if the employer ultimately rejects the applicant—violates the law.

Enforcement and remedies Civil penalties of up to $100 per violation may be assessed by the Vermont Attorney General or Human Rights Commission. The law does not set out further procedural requirements on this point.

No further formal detail as of June 2026 Vermont law does not specify further detail about the method or length of the opportunity, and there is no published court or agency guidance clarifying this duty as of June 2026. Employers should document that applicants were granted a chance to respond, and should not make adverse decisions before hearing from the applicant during the proper stage of the process.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c)

Coverage of Vermont's criminal history inquiry restrictions ("ban the box"):

21 V.S.A. § 495j applies to nearly all Vermont employers, regardless of size, and does not set a minimum number of employees for coverage. The critical mechanism is in § 495j(e)(3), which states that for purposes of this section, '`Employer' has the same meaning as set forth in section 495d of this chapter.'

So what does § 495d require?

Section 495d(1) defines 'employer' as 'any individual, organization or governmental body, partnership, association, corporation, legal representative, trustee, receiver, trustee in bankruptcy and any common carrier by rail, motor, water, air or express company doing business in or operating within this State which has one or more individuals performing services for it within this State.' There is no threshold based on number of employees—even those with a single employee are covered. The statutory text makes no carve-out for small businesses, family firms, or sole proprietors.

Key points:

• Every Vermont employer with at least one employee in the state is subject to § 495j (the ban-the-box law)—except for the narrow position-based exceptions within § 495j(b).
• This coverage is broader than some federal and state employment laws that only apply starting at 5, 15, or 20 employees. Vermont explicitly omits any such threshold for criminal history inquiry restrictions.
• The 'employer' definition is also used in Vermont’s fair employment practices laws covering discrimination (21 V.S.A. § 495(a)), so this is a familiar threshold for practitioners experienced with Vermont employment law.

Bottom line: All Vermont employers, no matter how small, must comply with the restrictions on when and how they ask about criminal history under § 495j.

Sources: 21 V.S.A. § 495j, 21 V.S.A. § 495d(1)

Vermont pre-employment drug testing — statutory restrictions and requirements

Vermont law sharply limits when and how an employer can require drug testing of job applicants. Under 21 V.S.A. §§ 511–519, employers may only require a drug test from a job applicant after making a conditional offer of employment, and only if ALL of the following conditions are satisfied:

1. Timing: Post-offer only. Employers cannot require or request that an applicant submit to drug testing until after a conditional offer of employment has been extended ("conditional offer" means the applicant has met all other job requirements except passing the drug test; see § 512(a)(1)). Pre-application or pre-offer drug testing of job candidates is categorically prohibited.

2. Written notice and lab requirements. Before testing, the employer must provide the applicant with a written policy describing:

• The substances to be tested for;
• The applicant’s right to obtain a copy of any test results;
• The procedure to challenge or request retesting (the lab must be certified and independent); and
• The consequences of a positive result or refusal to test. (§ 513, § 514(b)).

The statute requires that all tests be conducted at laboratories certified by the US Department of Health and Human Services, or Vermont Department of Health, and that the employer's testing policy be available to applicants for review before testing (§ 514(a), (c)). Employers cannot rely on so-called on-site, instant, or non-lab screening results for pre-employment purposes.

3. Right to retest and confidentiality. Applicants must have the opportunity to have a portion of the original sample retested at their own expense. All test results must be treated as confidential, and may only be disclosed to the applicant and employer agents as authorized by law (§ 514(d)-(f)).

4. Restricted use of results. Test results may only be used for employment-related purposes and cannot be provided to third parties except as required by law (§ 514(e)).

Source: 21 V.S.A. §§ 511–519, 21 V.S.A. § 512, 21 V.S.A. § 514

Vermont's "ban the box" law requires that, whenever an employer lawfully inquires into an applicant’s criminal history during the hiring process (such as during an interview or after deeming the applicant otherwise qualified), the employer must provide the applicant an opportunity to explain the facts and circumstances of any conviction and to offer evidence of rehabilitation. This requirement is codified at 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c).

When is the opportunity required? This duty only arises after the point when the employer is permitted to ask about criminal history—generally, during or after an interview, or once a conditional offer of employment has been made. Vermont law prohibits criminal history questions on the initial job application, except for positions where state or federal law creates a mandatory or presumptive disqualification based on specific offenses (21 V.S.A. § 495j(a)-(b)). Once an inquiry is allowed, the applicant must have a chance to provide an explanation before any employment decision is made based on the record.

Scope of the opportunity:

• The applicant may explain the nature and circumstances of any conviction.
• The applicant may present evidence of postconviction rehabilitation.
• The law does not prescribe the format or length of the opportunity—employers may allow it verbally or in writing, but it must be provided before any adverse decision is made on the basis of disclosed convictions, unless applicable law categorically bars employment for that offense.

Enforcement and penalties: Failure to provide this opportunity can lead to a civil penalty of up to $100 per violation, as outlined by the statute. The law does not provide further details about the enforcement process or procedures for documenting compliance.

As of June 2026, there is no additional statutory, regulatory, or decisional guidance elaborating on this specific requirement beyond what appears in 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c).

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495j(c)

This section clears up whether the term “employer” (for purposes of Vermont’s Ban‑the‑Box law at 21 V.S.A. § 495j) adheres to the same definition in § 495d, and whether any staff‑size threshold applies.

Definition follows § 495d 21 V.S.A. § 495j(e)(3) states that “‘Employer’ has the same meaning as set forth in section 495d of this chapter.” That cross‑reference means that, for criminal‑history inquiry rules, an employer is any individual, organization, or governmental body—including partnerships, corporations, trustees, common carriers, agents, etc.—that has one or more individuals performing services for it within Vermont. The statute imposes no minimum‑employee threshold; even a sole proprietor with a single worker qualifies.

No employee‑count or size limitation in § 495j itself Section 495j contains no carve‑out based on number of employees or business size. Contrast that with § 495p (compensation‑disclosure mandates), which explicitly limits applicability to employers of five or more employees. No such language appears in § 495j or § 495d, confirming that the Ban‑the‑Box restrictions apply to all employers regardless of size.

Key takeaway for practitioners All employers—public or private—operating in Vermont and engaging at least one person in service are covered by § 495j’s restrictions on criminal‑history questions, with no employee‑count exceptions. This includes very small operations or single‑person enterprises.

Source: 21 V.S.A. § 495j(e)(3), 21 V.S.A. § 495d(1)